• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

BBall Recruiting Megathread 3.0 - The Manning era begins: The Harry Giles Chronicles

I don't trust this staff to accept another commitment. Next coach will really have his hands tied.
 
I did not get a chubster at all watching some Quadri Moore vids on youtube. In high school, he's a stand-around-and-watcher and not wildly athletic. Not unathletic, but not a jumper either.
 
Do you normally get aroused while watching teenage boys play basketball?

2011_11_12_joepa.jpg
 
I don't trust this staff to accept another commitment. Next coach will really have his hands tied.

I cannot imagine a rising star- type coach even considering this bottom feeding program. Assuming Bz is fired at the end of the season, I think we are 3-4 years from respectability from that point. This recruiting thread is simply not encouraging.
 
I cannot imagine a rising star- type coach even considering this bottom feeding program. Assuming Bz is fired at the end of the season, I think we are 3-4 years from respectability from that point. This recruiting thread is simply not encouraging.

What do you consider respectability? With a better coach and one of several of these combinations of recruits mentioned Wake should easily be a tourney team in Devin's junior year.
 
What do you consider respectability? With a better coach and one of several of these combinations of recruits mentioned Wake should easily be a tourney team in Devin's junior year.

Agreed, despite the past three years of sucktitude, we actually have a "good foundation" to build on. As much as that makes me cringe to say, it's probably true. Thomas, CMM and Moto are three very solid bases to a competitive ACC basketball team.
 
A team that could "compete" to get into the NCAAs, sure. But not one that would be cutting down nets, I don't think.


And if we have gone through the last 3 years just to get back where we were before [Redacted] arrived, then that's just asinine.
 
A team that could "compete" to get into the NCAAs, sure. But not one that would be cutting down nets, I don't think.


And if we have gone through the last 3 years just to get back where we were before [Redacted] arrived, then that's just asinine.

Agreed. To me, respectability is being a tourney team - but that should be an average year for Wake.
 
Our "average" years should be winning at least one game in The Dance.
 
FWIW Wake has made the NCAAT 22 times since 1938 (22/75 or 29.3%). Obviously it was harder to make the NCAA back when you had to win the ACC. We have made the tournament 17 times since 1977-1978 (just over 50%).

I think making the tournament is an average year, whether or not we win in the tournament is very dependent on who we play.
 
FWIW Wake has made the NCAAT 22 times since 1938 (22/75 or 29.3%). Obviously it was harder to make the NCAA back when you had to win the ACC. We have made the tournament 17 times since 1977-1978 (just over 50%).

I think making the tournament is an average year, whether or not we win in the tournament is very dependent on who we play.

Yes, more specifically it depends on seed. And seed depends on the season.
 
We should make the tournament every year. Period. OK, maybe we can miss once or twice a decade, but that's it.
 
Do you normally get aroused while watching teenage boys play basketball?

He can't always do this on purpose. gaybone was born for this very reason.

Jaybone has some serious demons--none of which are deacons.
 
This sentiment is tossed around a lot, but by this standard we have had below average years for the better part of two decades.

Our regular seasons have been good on average. The postseason has been poor relative to seed. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect Wake to be a #5-#12 seed most years with the occasional higher seed and occasional NIT season.
 
Our regular seasons have been good on average. The postseason has been poor relative to seed. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect Wake to be a #5-#12 seed most years with the occasional higher seed and occasional NIT season.

I think that's right. I expect Wake to do about as well as, say, Villanova over the last decade. Consistent tournament appearances, with the occasional run into the elite eight or, with luck, beyond.
 
Back
Top